I've heard relatives of victims on both sides of the argument, one who was very much opposed to his release, another who agrees with the Scottish government to be compassionate.
They both agree that he was a pawn and certainly not the key figure who was responsible for the terrorist act. They both agreed that Libya/the Libyan government held a great role in the plot, but would never be convicted or even proven in a court. That's pretty much where the agreements ended. The woman who wanted to be compassionate I heard this morning, before he was released. The man who was against the release was this afternoon, after he had been flown to Libya on Khadafi's private jet and given a hero's welcome home. He said the whole thing felt like a slap in the face, as did watching our Presidents of both parties talk politely with Khadafi, shake hands with him, praise him for disarming, and not make one move toward stopping his release prior to it happening.
I do not think he should have been released. Even if he only had a small part in the overall responsibility of the crime, he was still convicted. I realize "Life" sentences have different meanings in different states, let alone in different countries. But to me, Life in Prison means exactly that - you stay there until they bring you out in a coffin. Whether that is 8-9 years because of cancer (karma's a real bitch, isn't she?) or 35+ years, the point of release is the same. I do not think that serving less than 8 years for the deaths of 270 people and then going home to a hero's welcome and being honored for the rest of your life, even if it's short, is anywhere near justice.
I don't have compassion for him. None. Guess I'm just a heartless conservative. Don't care. He should have died in prison.
